T M S S- S l c a (S-lca)

blurtedweeweeSoftware and s/w Development

Dec 2, 2013 (3 years and 6 months ago)

171 views

U
nited
n
ations
e
nvironment
P
rogramme
T
he
M
eThodological

S
heeTS

for
S
ub
-
caTegorieS

in

S
ocial
l
ife
c
ycle

a
SSeSSMenT
(S-lca)
P
re
-P
ublication
V
ersion
Copyright © United Nations Environment Programme and SETAC. 2013
This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for
educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright
holders, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. UNEP would appreciate
receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use
of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose
whatsoever without prior, individual permission in writing.
Disclaimer
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do
not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations
Environment Programme concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city
or area or of its authorities, or concerning delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
Moreover, the views expressed do not necessarily represent the decision
or the stated policy of the United Nations Environment Programme,
the European Commission, any national government or
any other organization participating in the International
Life Cycle Initiative Board. The Life Cycle Initiative
complements ongoing national and regional activities.
Citing of trade names or commercial processes does
not constitute endorsement. Information contained
herein does not necessarily reflect the policy or
views of the Society of Environmental Toxicology
and Chemistry (SETAC). Mention of commercial
or noncommercial products and services does
not imply endorsement or affiliation by SETAC.
Follow the Life Cycle Initiative’s activities via:

» Twitter (@LC_Initiative)

» Facebook

» LinkedIn Groups

» LC Net (subscribe at www.lifecycleinitiative.org)
UNEP
promotes environ-
mentally sound practices
globally and in its own activities.
This publication has been produced in
electronic format only. Our distribution
policy aims to reduce UNEP’s
carbon footprint.
THE METHODOLOGICAL SHEETS
FOR SUBCATEGORIES IN SOCIAL
LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT (S-LCA)
A joint organisation of
UNEP and SETAC
P
re
-P
ublication
V
ersion
2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Authors

• Catherine Benoît Norris (New Earth), Editor
• Marzia Traverso (Sustainable Engineering, Technical
University of Berlin)
• Sonia Valdivia (UNEP)
• Gina Vickery-Niederman (University of Arkansas)
• Juliane Franze (GreenDelta)
• Lina Azuero (CDM Smith)
• Andreas Ciroth (GreenDelta)
• Bernard Mazijn (Ghent University)
• Deana Aulisio (University of New Hampshire)
Peer Reviewers
• Fabienne Pierre, UNEP
• Adriana Zacarias, UNEP
• Charles Mbohwa, South Africa, University of
Johannesburg
• Louise Dreyer, Denmark
• Luigia Petti, Italy
• Jane Bare, US EPA
• Bérénice Gerphagnon, France
• Reinout Heijungs, CML Leiden University, The
Netherlands
• Tom Swarr, Int Journal of LCA
• Cassia Ugaya, Brazilian Life Cycle Association,
Brazil
The completed set of methodological sheets is an
achievement that would not have been possible
without the vision of Bernard Mazijn; the early
work of Catherine Benoît, Julie Hébert, and Sophie
Spillemaeckers; the early support of Jean-Pierre
Revéret, Andrée-Lise Méthot, Véronique Jampierre
and CIRAIG, the guidance, support, and determination
of Sonia Valdivia; the hard work and dynamism of
Andreas Manhart, Siddhart Prakash, Asa Moberg,
Cassia Ugaya, Julie Parent, and Carmela Cucuzella;
the reflectivity of Bo Weidema, Greg Norris, and
Andreas Ciroth; the participation of Ulrike Bos, Tabea
Beck, Leif Barthel, and Pierre Mazeau; and finally, the
commitment and exceptional work of Lina Azuero,
Gina Vickery, Marzia Traverso, Juliane Franze, Deana
Aulisio and Catherine Benoît. A huge thank you to the
peer reviewers that delivered excellent comments and
helped brought the sheets to the next level and New
Earth which supported this work to a large extent.
Printing of this publication was supported by a
workshop on Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment,
co-organized by GreenDelta, Chalmers University, and
the UNEP/SETAC life cycle initiative, held on August
29 2013 in Gothenburg, Sweden.
3
CONTENTS
Acknowledgements

2
Guide to the Methodological Sheets

5
Local Community

13
Value Chain Actors

51
Consumer

67
Worker

87
Society

125
4
5
Introduction
The UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative Social
LCA Project group started the work on
methodological sheets in 2005. Many versions
of the sheets were drafted and discussed
since then and those discussions have heavily
influenced the development of the Guidelines
for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products,
published by UNEP and SETAC in May 2009.
After the publication of the Guidelines, the group
worked to publish the methodological sheets to
complement the Guidelines. These two resources
are to be used in parallel. The Guidelines provide
context for the methodological sheets, related
to goals and methods, which is critical to
understanding and properly taking advantage of
the methodological sheets.
The first public version of the methodological
sheets was published in 2010 on the UNEP Life
Cycle Initiative’s website.
The new 2013 version of the 31 methodological
sheets, one for each of the subcategories
identified in the Guidelines, are available for
download at the UNEP Life Cycle Initiative’s
website. These sheets have undergone several
internal and external reviews, including a formal
peer review directed by UNEP Life Cycle Initiative.
The sheets are meant and are consider to be
work in progress, meaning that they will continue
to evolve as more practical experience is gained,
and impact methodologies get further developed.
Objectives of the Sheets
The Methodological Sheets for Subcategories in
Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) supplement
the Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment
of Products published by UNEP/SETAC in 2009
and were developed as a public resource to guide
the application of S-LCA. The goal pursued by
those sheets is to provide an hands-on tool for
colleagues wishing to design and conduct S-LCA
studies and provide detailed information on each
of the subcategories introduced in the Guidelines
organized by stakeholder category.
The sheets have been developed recognizing
that data collection is the most labor intensive
activity when carrying a Social LCA. Therefore,
different indicators may be used depending on
data availability and the goal and scope of the
study. The sheets are meant to inspire S-LCA
case studies based on the Guidelines rather than
to represent a complete set of indicators that must
be included and criteria that must be met.
Some more specific goals pursued with the
development of the guidelines included:
• Avoid misunderstandings about subcategories
and clarify their relation to stakeholder groups;
• Provide a “measurement recipe” for each of
the subcategories in the S-LCA framework,
including examples of inventory indicators,
units of measurement, and potential data
sources for hotspot assessment, as outlined
in the Guidelines;
• Provide measurement sources and
background information sources for baseline
data that could be used in S-LCA;
• Enhance the ease and the consistency of
application across different case studies;
• Provide a comprehensive open source
resource for S-LCA;
It is foreseen and desireable that the method-
ological sheets are a living resource in the sense
that they continue to evolve and their content is
expanded over time.
GUIDE TO THE METHODOLOGICAL SHEETS
6
Formal Peer Review
During the formal consultation process three
critical questions were posed to reviewers to
assess the relevance and accuracy of the sheets
(Benoît-Norris, et al., 2011), based on the specific
goals they are intended to achieve, these were:
• Are the subcategory definitions proposed
concisely presenting the main concepts
and key elements to be monitored in each
methodological sheet?
• Is there potential for improving the proposed
subcategory definition?
• Are the examples of subcategory indicators
and data sources helpful in understanding
assessment of the subcategory?
Reviewers comments were categorized under
three main types: general, technical or editorial
(UNEP/SETAC-LCI, 2010c). A total of 145
comments from six reviewers with distinct relevant
expertise regarding the stakeholder categories
to which they were assigned were compiled.
From this total 33 percent of the comments were
technical, 17 percent were general, 36 were
editorial and 14 were either general/technical or
editorial/technical.
Technical comments focused mostly on providing
additional supporting standards or conventions
to the subcategory, or refining language to match
that of international agreed upon conventions,
or suggesting additional sources of information
to identified metric/indicators. There were two
specific comments that provided insight to
improve the sheets overall.
These included the issue of relevance of the
subcategories to sustainable development
and the lack of information regarding impact
assessment methodologies. Similarly, there was
a proposal to split the definition section into two,
that responded specifically to the question of the
coherence of the sheets.
There was one comment suggesting retiring
the Subcategory Prevention and Mitigation of
Armed Conflict, as it was considered more a
responsibility of the “political sphere”. Under the
general type of comments some relate to the
difficulty users may have in understanding how to
use of corporate–wide data to assess product-
specific performance.
Others were targeted at proposing a closer
linkage with ISO 26000 Guidance on Social
Responsibility, which in turn would provide
material for addition of new subcategories.
Other relates to the “struggles” with the overlap
of subcategories and stakeholder groups”,
pointing out specifically to local community
and society. There was a specific suggestion to
add “conducting site-specific audits” to collect
data, to which the S-LCA Guidelines also make
reference. Nevertheless, in general there is the
perception that reviewers seem to agree that
the methodological sheets provide valuable
information, although some point out that they are
at a starting point.
7
Social LCA and Impact
Assessment
The S-LCA Project Group working on the
development of the Guidelines, faced some
complexities when discussing the best approach
to stakeholder and impact categories and to
impact assessment modeling.
Social life cycle impact assessment is the
process by which inventory data is aggregated
within subcategories and categories to help
understand the magnitude and the significance
of the data collected in the Inventory phase
using accepted level of minimum performance.
According to the Guidelines, this would be
achieved in three steps:
• Selecting impact categories and
characterization methods and models;
• Linking inventory data to a particular [social life
cycle impact assessment] subcategories and
impact categories (classification);
• Determining (calculating) results for the
subcategory indicators (characterization).
So, why is life cycle impact assessment so
complex in S-LCA if the process is, as described
above clearly outlined? Because in S-LCA there
is very little information regarding cause-effect
chain models that would enable practitioners
to aggregate results (characterization) in an
accurate manner. What is described above would
be the carcass; the detail to actually achieve
that is still not widely agreed upon by S-LCA
practitioners.
The Guidelines have proposed to use Life
Cycle Attribute Assessment in order to facilitate
LCIA type calculations. Life Cycle Attribute
Assessment consists in calculating the
percentage of an activity variable such as worker
hours which possesses an attribute of interest.
That way worker hours act as an elementary flow
and the number or percentage of workers hours
for which issues are eg. under control or above
compliance can be calculated.
There are several life cycle impact assessment
approaches that have been proposed and that
are used by groups applying Social LCA.
Most of the characterization models developed
relates to Type 1 Impact categories.
In S-LCA, the impact categories are logical
groupings of S-LCA results, related to social
issues of interest to stakeholders and decision
makers. Midpoints and Endpoints exist at
different points along a “social impact pathway”
that begins with a social intervention and leads
to different levels of impacts. However in social
assessment there are very few demonstrated
cause-effect chain models.
S-LCA impact assessment will depend on a
company’s behavior when conducting a site-
specific assessment or companies average
behaviors in a country specific sector or related
to a country specific production activity when
conducting generic assessments. In which
case the assessment is by principle rather than
by consequence. This is why it is argued that
the subcategories represent “what we want to
protect”. The subcategories can be aggregated
in impact categories which represent themes of
interest stakeholders and may include: health and
safety, human rights, working conditions, socio-
economic repercussions, cultural heritage and
governance. Type 1 impact categories, do not
use cause-effect chain modeling and rely on other
information such as, internationally accepted levels
of minimum performance, to help understand
the magnitude and the significance of the data
collected in the inventory phase. This is what the
Guidelines identify as “thresholds”. It is noted that
the use of Performance Reference Points allows
the evaluation of the position of the unit process
Guide to the Methodological Sheets
8
assessed relative to the performance expected
from an international convention, a Social
Responsibility best practice guideline or even
when compared to other countries.
The Type 1 impact assessment methods
developed generally use an ordinal scale that
either describes the risk (from very high to low),
the performance (from non-compliant to best
practice) or the degree of management from
uncontrolled to under control. Some methods
also compare the results to the context.
In turn, type 2 impact categories, correspond
to a model of the social impact pathways to the
endpoints human capital, cultural heritage and
human well-being. Type 2 impact categories use
characterization models that seek to represent
the impact pathways, as in E-LCA which require
the use of quantitative data and cause-effect
chain modeling to aggregate indicators to a
midpoint or endpoint-level.
In relation to the methodological sheets, these all
are critical aspects for the sheets in their current
state and as they evolve. It is foreseen that
future versions of the sheets will provide further
guidance on Life Cycle Impact Assessment.
Overview of the Sheets
The UNEP/SETAC S-LCA Project Group reached
consensus on using the stakeholder category
framework as the “backbone” of the guidelines,
hence of the methodological sheets. The main
reasoning behind it being that stakeholder
categories “provide a comprehensive basis for
articulation of the subcategories”.
Under this precept, the methodological sheets
have been organized by stakeholder categories—
Workers, Local Community, Society (national and
global), Consumers, and Value Chain Actors -
under which each relevant subcategory identified
in the Guidelines is further elaborated. These
stakeholder categories were chosen, as they
were “deemed to be the main groups potentially
impacted by the life cycle of a product”. However,
this doesn’t imply that additional stakeholder
categories could not be added.
The stakeholder classification for S-LCA has its
origins in stakeholder theory, where it was argued
that managers would get a better understanding
of the complex issues around their business and
A sculpture in the ‘Jardin des Droits de l’Homme’
(Aiguillon, France) cites the first article of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The entrance of a microenterprise established to
empower women in rural Costa Rica.
9
lead them successfully, if they involved a broader
spectrum of stakeholders, beyond shareholders.
This theory is widely accepted today, as it forms
the basis of many of the CSR and sustainability
reporting frameworks. But beyond this theory
being widely accepted, the real benefit of applying
it to the S-LCA methodology is that it will ensure
perspectives from all relevant groups are taken
into consideration when assessing the social and
socio-economic impacts of products throughout
their life cycle.
The selection of the subcategories was achieved
by looking at international agreements, standards
and guidelines that have been developed by
multi-stakeholder groups—as they capture
consensus of wide audiences. In this way, the
S-LCA Project Group sought to minimize bias
and subjectivity when selecting indicators.
These agreements and guidelines include the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Global
Reporting Initiative, the ISO 26000, and the OECD
Guidelines for Multinational Corporations among
others. Along these lines, the S-LCA methodology
aligns with principles, guidelines and standards
that have been or are being incorporated into
business practices, therefore facilitating the
adoption of the S-LCA framework.
The methodological sheets present a definition
for each subcategory identified in the S-LCA
Guidelines. It relates the subcategories subjects to
the relevant international instruments, it provides
examples of initiatives which are promoting or
integrating the themes of interest in their resource/
certification or requirement and finally give
examples of metrics that can be used to monitor
the themes via hotspots assessment using generic
data and via site specific assessment.
The site-specific and generic indicators and data
examples do not constitute a complete list of the
best indicators to use in a study. Other indicators
might be more appropriate to use depending of
the context. The resource aims at guiding towards
relevant sources and proposing a few metrics
that can be valuable to consider. By doing so, the
S-LCA project group is documenting everyone of
the subcategories presented in the Guidelines and
for which it is advised that a statement be made
when presenting results of a S-LCA study.
The methodological sheets do not present
examples of characterization models in the current
version.
Help Guide to the
methodological sheets
To facilitate the analysis and promote consistency,
an agreed-upon structure was identified for the
methodological sheets. Every subcategory is
described using the following sections: Definition,
Policy relevance, Assessment of data, Generic
data source examples, Site-specific data source
examples and references.
Each section of the sheets is being explained
below presenting the key elements.
Guide to the Methodological Sheets
Coocafe, a coffee cooperative enterprise, in Costa Rica,
bringing fair trade coffee to the market.
10
Stakeholders and Subcategories
Methodological sheets have been grouped
according to five stakeholders: Workers,
Consumers, Local Community, Society and
Value Chain Actors. Within each stakeholder
group, sheets have been prepared for several
assessment subcategories. (For example,
Freedom of Association is a subcategory of the
Worker stakeholder group).
Policy Relevance
Relevance to Sustainable Development
This section explains the importance of assessing
this subcategory, specifically ways in which the
subcategory might enhance or deter sustainable
development. In this context, the concept of
sustainable development stems from the work
of the UN World Commission on Environment
and Development (WCED), which described
sustainable development in the Bruntland Report
as “… a process of change in which the exploitation
of resources, the direction of investments, the
orientation of technological development and the
institutional change are made consistent with
future as well as present needs.” In its definition,
the WCED prioritizes the needs of the world’s poor
and acknowledges limitations imposed by the
state of technology and social organization on the
environment’s ability to meet present and future
needs (see Chapter 2.1 of the Guidelines).
International Conventions and
Agreements
This list contains international conventions and
agreements that relate to the subcategory. These
sources range from the general (e.g. the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights) to targeted references
(e.g. the ILO Prevention of Major Industrial
Accidents Convention is a targeted reference for the
Safe and Healthy Living Conditions subcategory).
These sources provide a general understanding
of internationally agreed upon norms that may be
used as Social LCA benchmarks.
International Targets/Recommended
Standards
This section lists international principles,
guidelines, goals and performance standards that
relate to the subcategory. Many of these sources
contain information that relates to Social LCA
subcategory metrics. For example, sustainability
reporting frameworks often request specific
information from organizations that is relevant to
Social LCA. For certain organizations, these data
are available in publicly available reports.
Assessment of Data
Data Needed to Compile the
Subcategory
Social LCA data may take several forms, depending
on the goals of the assessment. Data may be
quantitative, semi-quantitative (yes/no or rating
scale responses) or qualitative (descriptive text).
This section provides examples of data sources for
these different categories. Suggestions for where
Definition
This box provides the subcategory’s basic
definition in a first section and the aim and
approach of indicator assessment in a second
section. This second section describes the
specific objective pursued by the assessment
of this subcategory, along with a brief
explanation of how to assess it. This brings
practical clarity to the existing definition.
It is expected that this section will also
help practitioners setting the “scope of the
assessment”.
The definitions often incorporate elements
from several different sources, rather than
relying on one specific standard. The sheets
highlight aspects of subcategory definitions
that are most relevant to S-LCA. In some
cases, methodological sheets describe
ways in which organizations can specifically
address the subcategory (e.g. through
organizational policies).
STAKEHOLDER Subcategory
11
to find these data are provided below as generic or
site-specific data sources.
National and International Data
Availability and Sources
Data sources are broken down into two
categories: Generic (Hotspot) Data and Site-
Specific Data. In Social LCA, generic data are
typically country-level data used as a screening
device to identify high-risk regions. Organizations
with extensive global supply chains may need
assistance determining where to focus site-
specific assessment efforts. Generic data provides
the organization with a sense of where negative
social outcomes are most likely. According to
the scope of the particular assessment, site-
specific investigation can then proceed in areas
highlighted as hotspots. (Note: If an organization
already has site-specific data for all units along
its supply chain, there would be no need for a
generic screening.)
At present time the nonprofit organization New
Earth is making available a resource called the
Social Hotspots Database (SHDB). This tool
can play a role similar to Life Cycle Assessment
databases in assessing product hotspots, but
with the added benefit of geographical precision
and potential social impacts identification” (New
Earth, 2012). The development of these types
of tools will certainly facilitate performance of
S-LCAs, in particular those where the goal is
to identify hotspots. However, it is important to
keep in mind that with little information about
the enterprises or organizations and general
information about the location, it is not possible to
assess the detailed impacts.
Generic Data Source Examples
This section provides generic data sources that
relate to the subcategory, with links to actual
country level data in some cases. These data may
be direct measures of the subcategory or proxies,
depending on data availability. Most commonly
generic data is available in government,
intergovernmental and multilateral web sites.
Site-Specific Data Source Examples
This section suggests site-specific data sources
for organization-level Social LCA. These range
from site visits and site-specific audits to
interviews with community, government and
organizational representatives to organization-
specific reports, such as audits and public filings.
Understanding the implications of site-specific
data collection and prioritizing, is a crucial part of
the process as it is very costly, time consuming,
and often not relevant to collect data on site at
every organization involved in the production, use
and disposal of a good or a service.
Examples of Inventory Indicators, Units
of Measurement and Data Sources
Methodological sheets contain tables with
suggested inventory indicators (metrics) for
both generic and specific analysis. These tables
contain examples of assessment methods and
should not be viewed as extensive lists. The
tables also note whether data are available in
quantitative, semi-quantitative and/or qualitative
form and provide data sources for each indicator.
Limitations of the Subcategory
In some cases, methodological sheets describe
limitations of subcategory assessment (e.g.,
widespread lack of data or data bias). Not all
methodological sheets describe limitations.
This is not to imply that assessment of these
subcategories is without limitations. Actual
limitations may exist in specific circumstances.
References
Relevant documents and internet sites are listed
as references and as suggestions for further
information.
Authors
Co-authors of the sheets are referenced.
Guide to the Methodological Sheets
Stakeholder:
Local Community
Delocalization and Migration • Community Engagement • Cultural
Heritage • Respect of Indigenous Rights • Local Employment •
Access to Immaterial Resources • Access to Material Resources •
Safe and Healthy Living Conditions • Secure Living Conditions
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Delocalization and Migration



14

D
D
e
e
l
l
o
o
c
c
a
a
l
l
i
i
z
z
a
a
t
t
i
i
o
o
n
n


a
a
n
n
d
d


M
M
i
i
g
g
r
r
a
a
t
t
i
i
o
o
n
n


Definition
Economic development sometimes leads to the large-scale migration of individuals
seeking employment. Involuntary resettlement may occur if organizations directly or
indirectly dispossess individuals or groups of individuals of their land or resources.
In the case of migrant workers entering a community, the organization should consider
how well workers will integrate with more permanent residents. Organizations should
provide opportunities for communication and education between migrant workers and
permanent residents to minimize risks, such as violence and prostitution.
If operations require human relocation, organizations should engage in due diligence and
procedural safeguards. These safeguards include comprehensive impact assessments,
prior consultation and notification, provision of legal remedies, fair and just compensation
and adequate relocation (see UN Global Compact, Access to Adequate Housing).
Resettlement is considered involuntary when groups are not offered the right to refuse
acquisition that leads to displacement. Involuntary resettlement may occur even when the
dispossessed do not have legal claim to the land or resources.

Aim and approach of indicator assessment
The assessment aims to assess whether organizations contribute to delocalization,
migration or “involuntary resettlement” within communities and whether populations are
treated adequately.

!"#$%&'()#)*+,%)'
Relevance to Sustainable Development
As organizations enter emerging markets there is potential for delocalization and migration to
occur. Involuntary resettlement can lead to long-term social and economic hardships for
affected populations. Organizations should be aware of these effects and understand that
states may place economic development goals above the human rights of certain
populations. Organizations should engage with at risk populations and respond to their
concerns.
With regard to the migration of labor, while the migration of relatively skilled workers can
encourage economic development in host countries, home countries experience a loss of
human capital. At the same time, remittances to family members in home countries play an
important role in the economic development of less developed countries. In addition, migrant
workers may return home with new skills that contribute to economic development in their
home country.
International Conventions and Agreements
! International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 12
! United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
! The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 17
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Delocalization and Migration



15

International Targets/Recommended Standards
! AA1000 Accountability Principles Standard 2008
! IFC Performance Standard 5: Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement
! United Nations Global Compact, Principle 1
-..)../),0'"1'2+0+'
Data Needed to Compile the Subcategory
There are three forms of Social LCA data: quantitative, semi-quantitative (yes/no or rating
scale responses) and qualitative (descriptive text). For this subcategory, quantitative data
could describe the level of forced evictions and labor migration. This could be attributed to a
particular organization or described on a region/country level. Qualitative and semi-
quantitative data could describe and rate the strength of organizational policies related to
resettlement of community members. Qualitative and semi-quantitative data could also
describe procedures for incorporating migrant workers into the community.
National and International Data Availability and Sources
Generic Data Source Examples
! COHRE’s Global Survey on Forced Eviction, Legal Resources on Housing and Property
Restitution and country reports on housing and related rights:
! U.S. Department of State Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, including
discussion of Internally Displaced Persons
! UN International Migrant Stock: The 2008 Revision, including international migrants as a
percentage of population
Site-Specific Data Source Examples
! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members
! Interviews with governmental agencies
! Interviews with management
! Interviews with non-governmental organizations
! Organization-specific reports, such as UN COP reports
! Organization-specific audits, such as AA1000
! Site-specific Social Impact Assessment report
Examples of Inventory Indicators, Units of Measurement and Data Sources
Note: These tables contain example indicators meant to inspire S-LCA case studies. Tables
should not be viewed as extensive lists; appropriate indicators depend on study goal and
scope.
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Delocalization and Migration



16

Generic Analysis (Hotspots)
Inventory Indicator
Unit of
Measurement
Data Sources
Forced Evictions
stemming from
Economic
Development
Quantitative
COHRE’s Global Survey on Forced Eviction
describes specific events, causes and numbers
of people affected
Description of Causes
for and Treatment of
Internally Displaced
Persons
Qualitative/Semi
-Quantitative
U.S. Dept. of State Country Reports on Human
Rights Practices, including discussion of
Internally Displaced Persons

International Migrants
as a Percentage of
Population
Quantitative
UN International Migrant Stock, as percentage of
country/region population
Specific Analysis
Inventory Indicator
Unit of
Measurement
Data Methodology
Number of individuals
who resettle
(voluntarily and
involuntarily) that can
be attributed to
organization
Quantitative
!
Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members,
governmental agencies, management and
NGOs
! Review of organization-specific reports, such
as COP reports or audits
Strength of
organizational policies
related to resettlement
(e.g. due diligence and
procedural
safegaurds)
Qualitative/Sem
i-Quantitative
!
Site visit or site-specific audit Interviews with
community members, governmental
agencies, management and NGOs
! Review of organization-specific reports, such
as COP reports, audits and Social Impact
Assessments
Strength of
organizational
procedures for
integrating migrant
workers into the
community
Qualitative/Sem
i-Quantitative
!
Site visit or site-specific audit Interviews with
community members, employees,
governmental agencies, management and
NGOs
! Review of organization-specific reports, such
as COP reports or audits
Limitations of the Subcategory
The political nature of delocalization and migration issues may intefere with survey
administration or interview opportunities. Survey recipients/ interviewees may not participate
or answer with complete honesty out of fear or political pressure.
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Delocalization and Migration



17

()1)3),%).'
Reading

AccountAbiliity (2008). AA1000 AccountAbility Principles Standard 2008.
IFC (2007). Guidance Note 5: Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement. International
Finance Corporation.
Taylor, J.E. (2006). International Migration and Economic Development. International
Symposium on International Migration and Development, Turin, Italy, 28-30 June.
UN (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. United Nations.
UN (1948). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations.
UN (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. United Nations.
Internet Sites
United Nations Global Compact
United Nations Global Compact, Access to Adequate Housing
United Nations Global Compact, Internal Displacement
United Nations International Migrant Stock: The 2008 Revision
U.S. Department of State Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
-405"3.'
Gina Vickery, University of Arkansas
Catherine Benoît Norris, New Earth



18
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Community Engagement

C
C
o
o
m
m
m
m
u
u
n
n
i
i
t
t
y
y


E
E
n
n
g
g
a
a
g
g
e
e
m
m
e
e
n
n
t
t


Definition
Community stakeholders include individuals or community groups that may be affected
by the actions or products of an organization. Organizations should consider these
stakeholders in the development and implementation of business policies, particularly
those that affect local environment, health and well-being. An organization should attempt
to engage with a broad range of stakeholders that represent balanced community
interests. Community engagement should provide community members and leaders with
a venue to voice concerns. Organizations should respond to these concerns with a
strategic plan of action. Representatives at all levels of the organization should engage in
this continuous process.
Organizations also foster community engagement through direct involvement in
community initiatives and/or through financial support of community projects (e.g. Earth
Day activities, recycling initiatives and visits to local schools).


Aim and approach of indicator assessment
This subcategory assesses whether an organization includes community stakeholders in
relevant decision-making processes. It also considers the extent to which the
organization engages with the community, in general.


!"#$%&'()#)*+,%)'
Relevance to Sustainable Development
Community participation in decision-making is a fundamental aspect of sustainable
development (see Agenda 21). Organizations should enter communities with a willingness to
engage with diverse community members, particularly stakeholders that have been denied
access historically. Organizations should also become involved in and provide support for
community initiatives that align with principles of sustainable development. A comprehensive,
respectful approach to community engagement will lead to knowledge sharing and
strengthen opportunities for sustainable development
International Conventions and Agreements
! Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access
to Environmental Justice Matters (The Aarhus Convention)
International Targets/Recommended Standards
! AA1000 AccountAbility Principles Standard 2008
! AA1000 Stakeholder Engagement Standard
! Agenda 21, Section III
! Amnesty International Human Rights Principles for Companies
! G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines



19
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Community Engagement
! ISO 26000: Guidance on Social Responsibility, Clause 6.8 - Community Involvement and
Development
! Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business
Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights
! OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (General Policies)
! Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, Principle 10
! SA8000
-..)../),0'"1'2+0+'
Data Needed to Compile the Subcategory
There are three forms of Social LCA data: quantitative, semi-quantitative (yes/no or rating
scale responses) and qualitative (descriptive text). For this subcategory, qualitative and semi-
quantitative data might describe or rate the strength of an organization’s efforts to encourage
community engagement. Quantitative data might capture the number of annual community
meetings, while semi-quantitative data could describe the quality of meetings.
National and International Data Availability and Sources
Generic data source examples
! U.S. Department of State annual country reports on human rights, including freedom of
peaceful assembly and association and political participation
! World Economic Forum annual country rankings on transparency of government
policymaking and public trust of politicians
Site-specific data source examples
! Site visit or site-specific auditInterviews with community members
! Interviews with employees
! Interviews with management
! Interviews with non-governmental organizations
! Organization-specific reports, such as GRI reports
! Organization-specific audits, such as AA 1000 and SA8000



20
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Community Engagement
Examples of Inventory Indicators, Units of Measurement and Data Sources
Generic analysis (Hotspots)
Inventory Indicator
Unit of Measurement

Data Available
Freedom of Peaceful Assembly
and Association
Qualitative
U.S. Dept. of State Human Rights
Country Reports
Transparency of Government
Policymaking
Semi-Quantitative
World Economic Forum rankings, by
country

Public Trust of Politicians
Semi-Quantitative
World Economic Forum rankings, by
country

Specific Analysis
Inventory Indicator
Unit of
Measurement
Data Methodology
Strength of written policies
on community engagement
at organization level
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
!
Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members,
employees, management and NGOs
! Review of organization-
specific reports,
such as GRI reports or audits
Diversity of community
stakeholder groups that
engage with the
organization
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
!
Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members,
employees, management and NGOs
! Review of organization-
specific reports,
such as GRI reports or audits
Number and quality of
meetings with community
stakeholders
Quantitative/Qualit
ative/Semi-
Quantitative
! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members,
employees, management and NGOs
! Review of organization-
specific reports,
such as GRI reports or audits
Organizational support
(volunteer-hours or
financial) for community
initiatives
Quantitative ! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with management and
NGOs
! Review of organization-
specific reports,
such as GRI reports or audits
Limitations of the Subcategory
Weak community engagement may arise due to factors beyond organization control. This
may occur in communities that lack positive histories of civil engagement or among
populations that have been historically denied access to meaningful engagement. Note that
evaluation should consider the strength of organizational efforts to address community
engagement, even though efforts might not translate completely to effective community
interaction.



21
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Community Engagement
()1)3),%).
'
Reading
AccountAbility (2005). AA1000 Stakeholder Engagement Standard.
AccountAbility (2008). AA1000 AccountAbility Principles Standard 2008.
Amnesty International (1998). Human Rights Principles for Companies. AI Index: ACT
70/01/98.
GRI (2006). G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, Version 3.0. Global Reporting Initiative.
IFC (2007). Stakeholder Engagement: A Good Practice Handbook for Companies Doing
Business in Emerging Markets. International Finance Corporation.
ISO 26000 (2009). Guidance on Social Responsibility, Draft ISO/DIS 26000. International
Organization for Standardization
OECD (2008). OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development.
SAI (2008). Social Accountability 8000. Social Accountability International.
UN (1992). Agenda 21. United Nations.
UN (1992). Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. United Nations.
UN (2003). Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business
Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights. United Nations.
UNECE (1998). Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-
Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters. United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe.
World Economic Forum (2009). The Global Competitiveness Report: 2009-2010.
Internet Sites
Amnesty International Business and Human Rights Checklist
U.S. Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
-405"3.'
Gina Vickery, University of Arkansas
Catherine Benoît Norris, New Earth



22
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Cultural Heritage

C
C
u
u
l
l
t
t
u
u
r
r
a
a
l
l


H
H
e
e
r
r
i
i
t
t
a
a
g
g
e
e


Definition
Cultural heritage includes language, social and religious practices, knowledge and
traditional craftsmanship, as well as cultural spaces and objects (e.g. burial grounds).
International human rights conventions secure the rights of individuals to preserve their
cultural heritage. This includes practicing and revitalizing cultural traditions and religious
beliefs that are respectful of human rights.
Organizations can more actively promote the preservation of cultural heritage by
encouraging the sustainable use of traditional products and craftsmanship in their product
design and production methods. This is especially relevant to agricultural production
methods and clothing/craft design.

Aim and approach of indicator assessment
This subcategory assesses whether an organization respects local cultural heritage and
recognizes that all community members have a right to pursue their cultural development.

!"#$%&'()#)*+,%)'
Relevance to Sustainable Development
Globalization can lead to the deterioration of cultural heritage as organizations enter new
markets. Organizations should consider historical and evolving cultural traditions to be assets
of communities. Organizations that recognize and engage with diverse groups of individuals
will take important strides towards protecting the cultural integrity of local communities.
International Conventions and Agreements
! Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage
! Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 8(j)
! Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions
! ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention
! International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 18
! International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
! International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Article 5
! United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
! The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Articles 18, 22 and 27
! Agenda 21, Section I
! Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity




23
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Cultural Heritage
International Targets/Recommended Standards
! G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines
! ISO 26000: Guidance on Social Responsibility
! Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business
Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights
-..)../),0'"1'2+0+'
Data Needed to Compile the Subcategory
There are three forms of Social LCA data: quantitative, semi-quantitative (yes/no or rating
scale responses) and qualitative (descriptive text). For this subcategory, qualitative and semi-
quantitative data might describe or rate the strength of organization policies that address the
protection of cultural heritage, for example by incorporating expression of cultural heritage
into product design. Quantitative data could capture incidents of discrimination against
community members by the organization.
National and International Data Availability and Sources
Generic data source examples
! Business & Human Rights Resource Centre country reports on discrimination, including
racial/ethnic/caste/origin discrimination
! UNESCO Country Reports on Cultural Heritage
! UNESCO List of Intangible Heritage in Urgent Need of Safeguarding
! U.S. Department of State Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, including societal
abuses and discrimination with attention to issues faced by national/racial/ethnic
minorities
Site-specific data source examples
! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members
! Interviews with employees
! Interviews with management
! Interviews with non-governmental organizations
! Organization-specific reports, such as GRI reports
! Organization-specific audits, such as AA 1000 and SA8000
! Site-specific Social Impact Assessment report
Examples of Inventory Indicators, Units of Measurement and Data Sources
Note: These tables contain example indicators meant to inspire S-LCA case studies. Tables
should not be viewed as extensive lists; appropriate indicators depend on study goal and
scope.






24
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Cultural Heritage
Generic analysis (Hotspots)
Inventory Indicator
Unit of Measurement
Data Available
Cultural Heritage in
Urgent Need of
Safeguarding
Qualitative UNESCO Urgent Safeguarding List
Prevalence of Racial
Discrimination
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
Business & Human Rights Resource
Centre reports on racial discrimination

Specific Analysis
Inventory Indicator
Unit of Measurement
Data Methodology
Strength of Policies in
Place to Protect Cultural
Heritage
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
Site visit or site-specific audit

Interviews with community
members, management and NGOs

Review of organization-specific
reports, such as GRI reports and
Social Impact Assessments
Presence/Strength of
Organizational Program
to include Cultural
Heritage Expression in
Product
Design/Production
Qualitative/Semi -
Quantitative
Site visit or site-specific audit

Interviews with community members,
employees, management and NGOs
Is Relevant
Organizational
Information Available to
Community Members in
their Spoken
Language(s)?
Semi-Quantitative
Site visit or site-specific audit

Interviews with community members,
management and NGOs
Limitations of the Subcategory
There is a lack of formal data to support quantitative analysis of this indicator.



25
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Cultural Heritage
()1)3),%).'
Reading
GRI (2006). G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, Version 3.0. Global Reporting Initiative.
ILO (1989). Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169). International Labour
Organization.
ISO 26000 (2009). Guidance on Social Responsibility, Draft ISO/DIS 26000. International
Organization for Standardization
UN (1948). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations.
UN (1965). International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
United Nations.
UN (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. United Nations.
UN (1966). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. United Nations.
UN (1992). Agenda 21. United Nations.
UN (2003). Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business
Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights. United Nations.
UN (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. United Nations.
UNEP (1992). Convention on Biological Diversity (with annexes). United Nations.
UNESCO (2001). Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization.
UNESCO (2003). Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
UNESCO (2005). Convention on the Protection and Promotion of Cultural Expressions.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Internet Sites
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, Discrimination
United Nations Global Compact, Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion
UNESCO: Cultural Diversity
UNESCO: Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage
U.S. Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
-405"3.'
Gina Vickery, University of Arkansas
Catherine Benoît Norris, New Earth



26
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Respect of Indigenous Rights
R
R
e
e
s
s
p
p
e
e
c
c
t
t


o
o
f
f


I
I
n
n
d
d
i
i
g
g
e
e
n
n
o
o
u
u
s
s


R
R
i
i
g
g
h
h
t
t
s
s


Definition
Indigenous peoples have “a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial
societies that developed on their territories and consider themselves distinct from other
sectors of the societies now prevailing in those territories, or parts of them” (UN Global
Compact, Indigenous Peoples). Respect of indigenous rights includes the right to lands,
resources, cultural integrity, self-determination and self-government. Historically, states
have denied many indigenous populations these rights.
These rights relate to all human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognized in the
Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other
national and international human rights laws.
Organizations should engage with indigenous peoples to obtain consent for actions that
may affect their rights. Through these interactions, organizations have important
opportunities to learn from the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples.
Organizations should take care not to restrict the movement of indigenous peoples when
operating on or around their land. Organizations should also safeguard indigenous lands
by minimizing pollution and environmental degradation. Finally, organizations must
ensure that employment policies do not discriminate against indigenous individuals
seeking employment or working for the organization.
Aim and approach of indicator assessment
This subcategory assesses organizational respect for the rights of indigenous peoples, as
a group or as individuals.
!"#$%&'()#)*+,%)'
Relevance to Sustainable Development
Respect for indigenous rights and knowledge encourages sustainable development. It is not
uncommon, however, for states to place economic development over indigenous rights.
Organizations should be aware of this tendency when entering new markets. Organizations
should recognize that indigenous peoples have a vital role in sustainable development
because of their closeness to the land and traditional knowledge.



27
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Respect of Indigenous Rights
International Conventions and Agreements
! Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 8(j)
! Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage
! ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention
! International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 26
! International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture
! United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
! The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Articles 1, 2, 7 and 23
International Targets/Recommended Standards
! Agenda 21, Sections I, III and IV
! Amnesty International Human Rights Principles for Companies
! G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines
! ISO 26000: Guidance on Social Responsibility
! Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business
Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights
! Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, Principle 22
-..)../),0
of Data
Data Needed to Compile the Subcategory
There are three forms of Social LCA data: quantitative, semi-quantitative (yes/no or rating
scale responses) and qualitative (descriptive text). For this subcategory, qualitative and semi-
quantitative data might describe or rate the strength of organizational policies that address
the rights of indigenous peoples. Quantitative data could describe the number of meetings
held with indigenous community members. If an organization is charged with discrimination
against indigenous community members, qualitative data could describe the effectiveness of
the organization’s response.
National and International Data Availability and Sources
Generic data source examples
! Amnesty International Human Rights Reports, by country, including issues faced by
indigenous peoples http://www.amnesty.org/en/human-rights
! Business and Human Rights Resource Centre Country and Discrimination Reports,
including racial/ethnic/caste/origin discrimination
! U.S. Department of State Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, including societal
abuses and discrimination with attention to issues faced by national/racial/ethnic
minorities
Site-specific data source examples
! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members



28
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Respect of Indigenous Rights
! Interviews with employees
! Interviews with governmental agencies
! Interviews with management
! Interviews with non-governmental organizations
! Organization-specific reports, such as GRI reports
! Site-specific Social Impact Assessment report
Examples of Indicators, Units of Measurement and Data Sources
Note: These tables contain example indicators meant to inspire S-LCA case studies. Tables
should not be viewed as extensive lists; appropriate indicators depend on study goal and
scope.
Generic analysis (Hotspots)
Inventory Indicator
Unit of
Measurement
Data Available
Human Rights Issues
Faced by Indigenous
Peoples
Qualitative/Semi -
Quantitative
Amnesty International human rights
reports by country and issue, including
indigenous peoples
Prevalence of Racial
Discrimination
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
Business & Human Rights Resource
Centre reports on racial discrimination
Indigenous Land Rights
Conflicts/Land Claims
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
U.S. Department of State Human Rights
Reports, including issues faced by
indigenous peoples
Specific Analysis
Inventory Indicator
Unit of
Measurement
Data Methodology
Strength of Policies in
Place to Protect the
Rights of Indigenous
Community Members
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
!
Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members,
governmental agencies, management
and NGOs
! Review of organization-specific
reports, such as GRI reports and
Social Impact Assessments
Annual Meetings Held
with Indigenous
Community Members
Quantitative
!
Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members,
management and NGOs
! Review of organization-specific
reports, such as GRI reports
Response to Charges of
Discrimination against
Indigenous Community
Members
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
!
Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members,
governmental agencies, management
and NGOs
! Review of organization-specific
reports, such as GRI reports




29
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Respect of Indigenous Rights
Limitations of the Subcategory
There is a lack of quantitative data available to assess an organization’s respect of
indigenous rights.
()1)3),%).'
Reading
Amnesty International (1998). Human Rights Principles for Companies. AI Index: ACT 70/01/98.
FAO (2009). International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. Food
and Agriculture Organization.
GRI (2006). G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, Version 3.0. Global Reporting Initiative.
GRI (2006). Indicator Protocols Set Human Rights (HR), Version 3.0. Global Reporting
Initiative.
GRI (2006). Indicator Protocols Set Labor Practices and Decent Work (LA), Version 3.0.
Global Reporting Initiative.
ILO (1989). Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169). International Labour
Organization.
ISO 26000 (2009). Guidance on Social Responsibility, Draft ISO/DIS 26000. International
Organization for Standardization
UN (1948). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations.
UN (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. United Nations.
UN (1992). Agenda 21. United Nations.
UN (1992). Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. United Nations.
UN (2003). Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business
Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights. United Nations.


UN (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. United Nations.
UNEP (1992). Convention on Biological Diversity (with annexes). United Nations.
UNESCO (2003). Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Internet Sites
Amnesty International, Human Rights by Country
Amnesty International, Indigenous Peoples
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, Discrimination
United Nations Global Compact, Indigenous Peoples
United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
U.S. Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
-405"3.'
Gina Vickery, University of Arkansas
Catherine Benoît Norris, New Earth




30
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Local Employment


L
L
o
o
c
c
a
a
l
l


E
E
m
m
p
p
l
l
o
o
y
y
m
m
e
e
n
n
t
t


Definition
Local hiring preferences provide important income and training opportunities to
community members. Organizations that develop relationships with locally-based
suppliers will further encourage local employment and development.
Organizations also may encourage local community development by training local
employees in technical and transferable skills. Organizations can have a particularly
strong effect on local community development when they hire local employees for senior
management positions. This is likely to encourage open communication and trust with the
community.
Aim and approach of indicator assessment
This subcategory assesses the role of an organization in directly or indirectly affecting
local employment.

!"#$%&'()#)*+,%)'
Relevance to Sustainable Development
Organizations have great potential to encourage sustainable development through local
hiring preferences. Local employees have unique knowledge of important community issues
and can help the organization build strong community relations. Organizations that work to
build transferable business skills among employees will encourage sustainable development
as this knowledge may eventually transfer to locally-owned organizations.
International Conventions and Agreements
! ILO Convention concerning Employment Policy, 1964 (No. 122)
International Targets/Recommended Standard
! Agenda 21, Section I
! G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, Economic Performance Indicators and Labor
Practice and Decent Work Performance Indicators
! ILO R169 Employment Policy (Supplementary Provisions)
! ILO R189 Concerning General Conditions to Stimulate Job Creation in Small and
Medium-Sized Enterprises
! ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy
! ISO 26000: Guidance on Social Responsibility, Clause 6.8 - Community Involvement and
Development, Issue 3: Employment Creation and Skills Development, Issue 5: Wealth
and Income Creation and Issue 7: Social Investment
! OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (Employment and Industrial Relations
! Millenium Development Goals, Goal 1
! United Nations Global Compact, Principle 1



31
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Local Employment
-..)../),0'"1'2+0+'
Data Needed to Compile the Subcategory
There are three forms of Social LCA data: quantitative, semi-quantitative (yes/no or rating
scale responses) and qualitative (descriptive text). Many indicators for this subcategory are
available in a quantitative format (e.g. percentage of the workforce hired locally; percentage
of suppliers that are local). Qualitative or semi-quantitative data could be used to describe or
rate the strength of management policies related to local hiring preferences.
National and International Data Availability and Sources
Generic data source examples
! ILO Key Indicators of the Labour Market for employment statistics by country and sector
! World Economic Forum annual country rankings on networks, including local supplier
quantity
Site-specific data source examples
! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members
! Interviews with employees
! Interviews with governmental agencies
! Interviews with management
! Interviews with non-governmental organizations
! Organization-specific reports, such as GRI or UN COP reports
Examples of Inventory Indicators, Unit of Measurement and Data Sources
Note: These tables contain example indicators meant to inspire S-LCA case studies. Tables
should not be viewed as extensive lists; appropriate indicators depend on study goal and
scope.
Generic analysis (Hotspots)
Inventory Indicator
Unit of Measurement
Data Available
Unemployment
Statistics by Country
Quantitative
ILO data on unemployment
Poverty and Working
Poverty by Country
Quantitative ILO data on unemployment
Presence of Local
Supply Networks
Semi-Quantitative
World Economic Forum rankings of
supplier quantity, by country






32
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Local Employment
Specific Analysis
Inventory Indicator
Unit of Measurement
Data Methodology
Percentage of
workforce hired locally
Quantitative ! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with management
! Review of organization-specific
reports, such as GRI or COP reports
Strength of policies on
local hiring preferences
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
!
Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members,
employees, governmental agencies,
management and NGOs
! Review of organization-specific
reports, such as GRI or COP reports
Percentage of
spending on locally-
based suppliers
Quantitative
!
Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with management
! Review of organization-specific
reports, such as GRI or COP reports
Limitations of the Subcategory
Major limitations of this subcategory have not been identified. This does not imply that
indicators listed are ideal measures of impact. As with any assessment, measurement error
and bias in indicators can affect the accuracy of conclusions.
()1)3),%).'
Reading
GRI (2006). G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, Version 3.0. Global Reporting Initiative.
GRI (2006). Indicator Protocols Set Economic (EC), Version 3.0. Global Reporting Initiative.
GRI (2006). Indicator Protocols Set Labor Practices and Decent Work (LA), Version 3.0.
Global Reporting Initiative.
IFC Environment Division (2000). Investing in People: Sustaining Communities through
Improved Business Practice. International Finance Corporation.
ILO (1964). Convention Concerning Employment Policy. International Labour Organization.
ILO (1984). ILO R169 Employment Policy (Supplementary Provisions) Recommendation,
1984. International Labour Organization.
ILO (1989). Recommendation 189: Recommendation Concerning General Conditions to
Stimulate Job Creation in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. International Labour
Organization.
ILO (2006). Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and
Social Policy. International Labour Organization.
ISO 26000 (2009). Guidance on Social Responsibility, Draft ISO/DIS 26000. International
Organization for Standardization
OECD (2008). OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development.
UN (1992). Agenda 21. United Nations.
World Economic Forum (2009). The Global Competitiveness Report: 2009-2010.



33
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Local Employment
Internet Sites
ILO, Key Indicators of the Labour Market
Millennium Development Goals
United Nations Global Compact
-405"3.
'
Gina Vickery, University of Arkansas
Catherine Benoît Norris, New Earth



34
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Access to Immaterial Resources
A
A
c
c
c
c
e
e
s
s
s
s


t
t
o
o


I
I
m
m
m
m
a
a
t
t
e
e
r
r
i
i
a
a
l
l


R
R
e
e
s
s
o
o
u
u
r
r
c
c
e
e
s
s


Definition
Immaterial resources include community services, intellectual property rights, freedom of
expression and access to information.
Organizations may build community relations and improve access to immaterial
resources by promoting community services, such as health care, education and lending
programs. Organizations also build access to immaterial resources by sharing information
and knowledge and transferring technology and skills to the community. With regard to
intellectual property, organizations should respect and safeguard the moral and economic
rights of the creators of intellectual property.
Organizations limit access to immaterial resources by restricting freedom of expression
among employees or community members. (This does not include actions that prevent
employees from sharing confidential commercial information.) Organizations may be
complicit in suppressing local opinion if community members are arrested for protesting
corruption within the organization. Similarly, organizations may be complicit in limiting
freedom of expression if journalists are arrested for reporting on organization corruption.

Aim and approach of indicator assessment
This subcategory assesses the extent to which organizations respect, work to protect, to
provide or to improve community access to immaterial resources.

!"#$%&'()#)*+,%)
Relevance to Sustainable Development
As organizations expand into emerging markets, improving local services, access to
information and freedom of opinion are essential components of sustainable development.
Organizations should learn from and respect local knowledge and traditions. Organizations
should also transfer knowledge to the community through formal training programs and
general community education initiatives. Licensing of intellectual property rights should
respect and contribute to the long-term development of the community.
International Conventions and Agreements
! The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19
! Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access
to Environmental Justice Matters (The Aarhus Convention)
! International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Articles 19 and 21
International Targets/Recommended Standards
! AA1000 AccountAbility Principles Standard 2008
! AA1000 Stakeholder Engagement Standard
! Agenda 21, Sections I, II III and IV



35
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Access to Immaterial Resources
! G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, Labor Practices and Decent Work Performance
Indicators
! ISO 26000: Guidance on Social Responsibility
! Millennium Development Goals, Goal 8
! Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business
Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights
! OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (Preface, General Policies, Disclosure,
Employment and Industrial Relations, Science and Technology)
! Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, Principles 9 and 10
! SA8000
! United Nations Global Compact
-..)../),0'"1'2+0+'
Data Needed to Compile the Subcategory
There are three forms of Social LCA data: quantitative, semi-quantitative (yes/no or rating
scale responses) and qualitative (descriptive text). For this subcategory, qualitative and semi-
quantitative data could describe the history of an organization’s efforts to promote local
education initiatives and community service programs. Quantitative data could be used to
identify general hotspots; for example, the frequency of patent filings in emerging economies.
National and International Data Availability and Sources
Generic data source examples
! Amnesty International country reports on human rights, including freedom of expression:
! U.S. Department of State Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, including freedom
of speech and press
! World Economic Forum annual country rankings on specialized research and training
programs and technology transfer
! World Intellectual Property Organization’s World Intellectual Property Indicators
Site-specific data source examples
! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members
! Interviews with employees
! Interviews with governmental agencies
! Interviews with management
! Interviews with non-governmental organizations
! Organization-specific reports, such as GRI or UN COP reports
! Organization-specific audits, such as AA1000 and SA8000
! Site-specific Social Impact Assessment report



36
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Access to Immaterial Resources
Examples of Inventory Indicators, Unit of Measurement and Data Sources
Note: These tables contain example indicators meant to inspire S-LCA case studies. Tables
should not be viewed as extensive lists; appropriate indicators depend on study goal and
scope.
Generic analysis (Hotspots)
Inventory Indicator
Unit of Measurement
Data Available
Patent Filings
Quantitative
WIPO data on patent filings by origin,
including emerging countries
Freedom of
Expres
sion in Country
of Operation
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
Amnesty International human rights reports
provide annual information on freedom of
expression, by country
Levels of Technology
Transfer
Semi-Quantitative
World Economic Forum rankings for FDI
and technology transfer, by country

Specific Analysis
Inventory Indicator
Unit of Measurement
Data Methodology
Annual arrests
connected to protests
of organization actions

Quantitative ! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with governmental agencies,
management and NGOs
! Review of organization-specific reports,
including GRI and COP reports and
audits
Do policies related to
intellectual property
respect moral and
economic rights of the
community?
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members,
employees, governmental agencies,
management and NGOs
! Review of organization-specific audits,
such as ISO 26000, and social impact
assessments
Presence/strength of
community education
initiatives
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members,
employees, governmental agencies,
management and NGOs
! Review of organization-specific reports,
including GRI and COP reports, audits
and social impact assessments
Limitations of the Subcategory
Major limitations of this subcategory have not been identified. This does not imply that
indicators listed are ideal measures of impact. As with any assessment, measurement error
and bias in indicators can affect the accuracy of conclusions.



37
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Access to Immaterial Resources
()1)3),%).'
Reading
AccountAbility (2005). AA1000 Stakeholder Engagement Standard.
AccountAbility (2008). AA1000 AccountAbility Principles Standard 2008.
GRI (2006). G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, Version 3.0. Global Reporting Initiative.
GRI (2006). Indicator Protocols Set Labor Practices and Decent Work (LA), Version 3.0.
Global Reporting Initiative.
ISO 26000 (2009). Guidance on Social Responsibility, Draft ISO/DIS 26000. International
Organization for Standardization
OECD (2008). OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development.
SAI (2008). Social Accountability 8000. Social Accountability International.
UN (1948). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations.
UN (1992). Agenda 21. United Nations.
UN (1992). Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. United Nations.
UN (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. United Nations.
UN (2003). Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business
Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights. United Nations Doc.
E/CN.4/SUB.2/2003/12/REV.2
UNECE (1998). Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-
Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters. United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe.
World Economic Forum (2009). The Global Competitiveness Report: 2009-2010.
Internet Sites
Amnesty International, Human Rights by Country
Millineum Development Goals
United Nations Global Compact
United Nations Global Compact, Freedom of Opinion, Speech and Expression
U.S. Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
WIPO, World Intellectual Property Indicators
-405"3.'
Gina Vickery, University of Arkansas
Catherine Benoît Norris, New Earth



38
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Access to Material Resources




A
A
c
c
c
c
e
e
s
s
s
s


t
t
o
o


M
M
a
a
t
t
e
e
r
r
i
i
a
a
l
l


R
R
e
e
s
s
o
o
u
u
r
r
c
c
e
e
s
s


Definition
Communities and organizations may share the use of material resources (natural and
man-made) and have a mutual interest in protecting and enhancing the quantity and
quality of local resources and infrastructure.
Expanding operations carry the potential for depletion of and conflict over natural material
resources (e.g. water, forest land, home lands), especially in emerging or unstable
countries. Organizations should conduct risk assessments with attention to potential
conflict over material resources and engage with the local community over sustainable
methods for sharing resources.
Organizations should institute risk management plans for preventing, mitigating and
controlling environmental damage. This includes management attention to the
sustainable use of natural resources, pollution prevention and waste recycling.
Environment Management Systems are certifiable systems that help organizations
improve material resource conservation. Similarly, Social and Environmental Impact
Assessments are encouraged for business operations that are likely to have significant
adverse impacts on material resources.
Organizations and communities may also benefit from improving the quality of local
infrastructure. Assessment should consider the extent to which project-related
infrastructure, such as roadways and waste disposal systems, have positive long-term
effects on local economic development.
Aim and approach of indicator assessment
This subcategory assesses the extent to which organizations respect, work to protect, to
provide or to improve community access to local material resources (i.e. water, land,
mineral and biological resources) and infrastructure (i.e. roads, sanitation facilities,
schools, etc.).
!"#$%&'()#)*+,%)
Relevance to Sustainable Development
Expanding economic activities have placed pressure on material resources in developing
regions of the world. These resources are integral to community development. Access to
material resources may be restricted when organizations and communities are in conflict
over resource ownership or when organizations’ activities pollute and damage material
resources. At the same time, organizations may contribute to sustainable development by
providing or improving long-term project-related infrastructure and by protecting existing
natural resources and their related ecosystem services.



39
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Access to Material Resources
International Conventions and Agreements
! Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access
to Environmental Justice Matters (The Aarhus Convention)
! Convention on Biological Diversity
! International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
! International Targets/Recommended Standards
! Agenda 21, Sections I, II, III and IV
! G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, Environmental Performance Indicators
! IFC Performance Standards on Social & Environmental Sustainability
! ISO 14000: Environmental Management
! ISO 26000: Guidance on Social Responsibility
! Millennium Development Goals, Goal 7
! Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business
Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights
! OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (Environment and Commentary on the
Environment)
! Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, Principles 2, 4 and 17
! United Nations Global Compact, Principles 7-9
-..)../),0'"1'2+0+'
Data Needed to Compile the Subcategory
There are three forms of Social LCA data: quantitative, semi-quantitative (yes/no or rating scale
responses) and qualitative (descriptive text). For this subcategory, quantitative data could
indicate levels of industrial resource use. Qualitative and semi-quantitative data could describe
or rate the strength of operational risk assessments with regard to potential resource conflict.
Qualitative and semi-quantitative data also could describe the organization’s contribution to
community infrastructure or the strength of environmental management systems.
National and International Data Availability and Sources
Generic data source examples
! FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment for industrial impacts on forest land:
! OECD Environmental Data Compendium for industrial impacts on material resources,
including land, water, air and wildlife:
! World Bank data on biodiversity, extractive industries and water resources:
! United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Services,
World Soil Resources Map Index
! World Economic Forum annual country rankings for infrastructure quality
Site-specific data source examples
! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community members



40
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Access to Material Resources
! Interviews with employees
! Interviews with governmental agencies
! Interviews with management
! Interviews with non-governmental organizations
! Organization-specific reports, such as GRI or UN COP reports
! Organization-specific audits, such as ISO 14000
! Site-specific Social Impact Assessment report
Examples of Inventory Indicators, Unit of Measurement and Data Sources
Note: These tables contain example indicators meant to inspire S-LCA case studies. Tables
should not be viewed as extensive lists; appropriate indicators depend on study goal and
scope.
Generic analysis (Hotspots)
Inventory Indicator
Unit of Measurement
Data Available
Changes in Land
Ownership
Quantitative
FAO data on public versus private
ownership
of forest and other wooded land, by country

Levels of Industrial
Water Use
Quantitative
World Bank data on percentage of annual
freshwater withdrawals attributed to
industry, by country

Extraction of Material
Resources
Quantitative
OECD data on extraction of material
resources, by country and material type

Percent of Population
(Urban, Rural, Total)
with Access to
Improved Sanitation
Facilities
Quantitative World Bank data on water supply and
sanitation, by country





41
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Access to Material Resources
Specific Analysis
Inventory Indicator
Unit of Measurement
Data Methodology
Has the organization
developed project-
related infrastructure
with mutual
community access
and benefit
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
!
Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community
members, employees,
governmental agencies,
management and NGOs
! Review of organization-specific
reports, including GRI and COP
reports and audits
Strength of
organizational risk
assessment with
regard to potential for
material resource
conflict
Qualitative/Semi-
Quantitative
! Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with community
members, governmental agencies,
management and NGOs
! Review of organization- specific
reports, including GRI and COP
reports, audits and social impact
assessments
Does the organization
have a certified
environmental
management system
Semi-Quantitative
!
Site visit or site-specific audit
! Interviews with management
! Review of organization specific
reports, including GRI and COP
reports and audits
Limitations of the Subcategory
It is difficult to measure how an organization affects certain local material resources, namely
how land use changes impact biodiversity.
()1)3),%).'
Reading
GRI (2006). G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, Version 3.0. Global Reporting Initiative.
GRI (2006). Indicator Protocols Set Environment (EN), Version 3.0. Global Reporting
Initiatve.
IFC (2007). International Finance Corporation’s Guidance Notes: Performance Standards on
Social & Environmental Sustainability. International Finance Corporation.
ISO 14000 (2004). Environmental Management. International Organization for
Standardization
ISO 26000 (2009). Guidance on Social Responsibility, Draft ISO/DIS 26000. International
Organization for Standardization
OECD (2008). OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development.
UN (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. United Nations.
UN (1992). Agenda 21. United Nations.



42
STAKEHOLDER: Local Community Access to Material Resources
UN (1992). Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. United Nations.
UN (2003). Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business
Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights. United Nations Doc.